The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:15431 MFA No. 1674 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1674 OF 2023 (RCT) BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SHAILAJA, W/O LATE NARASIMHA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, 2. P.N.CHIRANTANA REDDY, S/O LATE NARASIMHA REDY, AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, APPELLANT NO.2 IS MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN 1ST APPELLANT. Digitally signed by RAMYA D Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BOTH ARE R/O KURUDIHALLI VILLAGE, CHALLAKERE TALUK, CHITRADURG DISTRICT. (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNA G.CONTRACTOR, ADVOCATE) …APPELLANTS AND: 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, HUBLI.
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. GOWTHAMDEV C. ULLAL, ADVOCATE) …RESPONDENT THIS MFA FILED U/S.23(1) OF THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ACT, 1987, AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 23.12.2022 PASSED IN CLAIM APPLICATION NO.OA(II U)/SBC/0108 OF 2016 ON THE FILE OF THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:15431 MFA No. 1674 of 2023
Decision
BENGALURU BENCH, DISMISSING THE CLAIM APPLICATION AS THERE IS NO ORDER AS TO COSTS. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT The present appeal is filed by the claimants questioning the judgment and award dated 23.12.2022 passed in Claim Application No.OA(II U)/SBC/0108 of 2016 on the file of the Railway Claims Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short), whereby the application filed for grant of compensation was dismissed. 2. It is the case of the claimants that on 16.02.2016 one Narasimha Reddy, who is the husband of claimant No.1 and father of claimant No.2, had been to Davanagere and while returning from Davanagere to Chitradurga by Chitradurga passenger train, the said Narasimha Reddy while alighting from the train slipped and fell down from the moving train and died on the spot in between Chitradurga and Amruthapura Railway - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:15431 MFA No. 1674 of 2023 Stations. Thus, the claimants filed a claim application for grant of compensation. 3. The reason assigned by the Tribunal while dismissing the claim application is that considering the nature of the injuries sustained and the condition of the deceased, it is not possible to accept that the deceased died while alighting the train. Hence, the present appeal is filed. 4. As could be seen from paragraph 5.8 of the judgment, the Tribunal has observed after perusal of inquest panchanama and postmortem report that the deceased had suffered serious crushed injuries. The injuries recorded includes "complete intersection of the body present at the level off lumbar sacral region with exposing the large and small intestines, bladder, blood vessels and fracture and dislocation of lumbar sacral vertebrate with exposing the nerves, muscles and kidneys of stomach with liver and spleen. Grease stain present around the margins of wound and over body surface". Therefore, considering the nature of the injuries, the Tribunal has come to the conclusion that it is difficult to accept that such injuries could be occurred due to falling down from the train and in this - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:15431 MFA No. 1674 of 2023 regard, the Tribunal has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kamrunnissa Vs. Union of India1. Therefore, the Tribunal suspecting the fall of the deceased from the moving train dismissed the claim application. 5. The Tribunal has not discussed anything as to whether the deceased was a bona fide passenger or not, had he purchased the ticket and traveled in the train. The claimants have produced the ticket before the Tribunal which was recovered by the Police during inquest panchanama. The documents were produced such as FIR, message issued by Station Master, Chitradurga to Police Sub-Inspector, Government Railway Police, Davanagere, police inquest report, post mortem report and police final report to prove the fact that the deceased died in the train accident. Further, Exhibit R.1 which is the DRM's Investigating Report, also proves the fact that the deceased died in the train accident. The only reason assigned by the Tribunal is that the body was cut into 1 (2019) 12 SCC 391 - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:15431 MFA No. 1674 of 2023 halves and such injuries could not occur if a person fell down from a moving train and dismissed the claim application. 6. It is not in dispute that the deceased had purchased the ticket and traveled in the train. When the deceased fell down from the moving train, it cannot be accepted that only such injuries could have been occurred. The observation made by the Tribunal is only on assumption and presumption basis. The railway authorities could avoid grant of compensation only when there is a criminal negligence or suicide or self-inflicted injury. 7. As per Section 124A of the Railways Act, 1989, the compensation is to be payable on the principle of strict liability. Therefore, the observation made by the Tribunal while dismissing the claim application is not correct as it is only on assumption and presumption basis. It is not the case of respondent-railway authorities that the deceased had committed suicide or died from criminal act. In the absence of such evidence by the respondent, it is not proper for the Tribunal to dismiss the claim application. Therefore, when it is proved that deceased after purchasing the ticket traveled in the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:15431 MFA No. 1674 of 2023 train, thus proved to be a bona fide passenger and died in the train accident. Therefore, the claimants have proved their claim as discussed above and are entitled for compensation from the respondent-railway authorities. Therefore, the judgment passed by the Tribunal is liable to be set aside. 8. The deceased died in the accident on 16.02.2016. Therefore, the claimants are entitled to a compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of the claim application till the date of realization. 9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kamukayi and Others Vs. Union of India and Others2, wherein at paragraph No.23 has held as under: "23. Accordingly and as per above discussion we allow this appeal and set aside the impugned judgment dated 26.03.2021 passed by the High Court and also the Claims Tribunal dated 29.06.2017. Consequently, claim application is allowed. The appellants are held entitled for compensation to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/- along with interest @ 7% p.a. from the date of filing the claim application till its realization. It is made clear that after applying the rate of interest, if the final figure is less than Rs.8,00,000/-, then appellants shall be entitled to 2 (2023) 6 SCR 329 - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:15431 MFA No. 1674 of 2023 Rs.8,00,000/-. The amount of compensation be satisfied by the respondents within a period of eight weeks. No order as to costs." 10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in case the accident was occurred in the year 2003 and awarded compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- along with interest from the date of petition till the date of realization and also it is made clear that after applying the rate of interest, if the final figure is less than Rs.8,00,000/-, then the claimant is entitled to Rs.8,00,000/-. Therefore, in the present case also, compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 8% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization is awarded to the claimants and if this figure comes less than Rs.8,00,000/-, then the appellants-claimants are entitled to a maximum compensation of Rs.8,00,000/-. 11. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment dated 23.12.2022 passed in Claim Application No.OA(II U)/SBC/0108 of 2016 by the Railway Claims - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:15431 MFA No. 1674 of 2023 Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore is set aside. (iii) The claimants being wife and son of the deceased are entitled to compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a., from the date of claim application till the date of realization. (iv) It is also made clear that after applying the rate of interest, if the final figure is less than Rs.8,00,000/-, then the claimant is entitled to Rs.8,00,000/-. Therefore, in the present case also, compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest at the rate of 8% p.a., from the date of claim application till the date of realization is awarded to the claimants and if this figure comes less than Rs.8,00,000/-, then the appellants/claimants are entitled to a maximum compensation of Rs.8,00,000/-. (v) No order as to costs. (vi) Draw decree accordingly. Sd/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE PGG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 30